Patreon LogoYour support makes Blue Moon possible (Patreon)

Is the Justice System Failing?

So as the title hints, is the justice system failing?

  • Total voters
    32
The majority of rich people in the US are white men, so I can understand the confusion.

Now let's ignore Brigid's imprecise terms for a moment, substitute class for race and explicitly state the implied allegation that the law and the legal system are administered by the rich for the benefit of the rich (and by "rich" I mean "can afford to buy (or at least rent) a legislator"). Do you wish to refute the modified argument?
 
I already responded to that when I agreed that the system, in relying on the Human Condition, is subject to mistakes and manipulation.

That said, I disagree that only rich people benefit; the left-wing Socialist element seem to be getting a free ride, too.
 
I find it hard to argue with vague assertions and ill-defined terms. From my experience, when people say "left-wing Socialist element" they usually mean "anyone who cares about society as a whole more than I do".

Regardless, I fail to see how the so called "Justice System" could work better or worse for people with particular political views. Last time that I checked, no laws on the books concerned themselves with party affiliation (other than during the red scare, but that's an opposite example to your assertion).

Concrete examples that I could sink my teeth into will be welcome.
 
Certainly.

Here in Australia, the state of Victoria, our [sarc]beloved, most wise and intelligent Premier[/sarc] (very much a card-carrying socialist) has just decided that he is going to relax Bail laws for juvenile criminals - against the advice of community groups and the Police. What does this mean? This means that a juvenile criminal who has been convicted of one or more felonies can be granted Bail (which means that restrictions and conditions are imposed in return for not serving time, the breaking of which means that harsher penalties will then be applied). Our Premier's change of laws means that juveniles who breach their Bail conditions will now face no penalties at all. All done in the name of "a better society" (where anarchy - a typical tool of the socialist left - will be given greater precedence).

Here in our lovely country of Australia a man can knowingly bring wilful and devastating harm another person and then, on being convicted, go to prison, where he gets free room and board, three square meals a day, exercise facilities, internet facilities, phone calls, access to fully-subsidised university courses...while the person harmed struggles with their day-to-day life without any assistance whatsoever. This is done in the name of "human rights" - nevermind that the victim was the one whose rights were breached. Again, a position of the socialist left / "progressive" element.

Do socialists care about society? Maybe they do. Do they care about anyone else's opinions? Not from where I sit, they don't. There are many, many more examples I could provide about "progressives" being more backwards than conservatives, but that conversation is not for this thread.
 
Your example has nothing to do with "the left-wing Socialist element getting a free ride". You could claim that "the left-wing Socialist element" is giving a free ride to juvenile delinquents, but that's a different assertion, one that I could comment on after reading the language of the bill in question rather than getting my information from unverified sources.

As for the correct balance between punishment and rehabilitation, opinions are all over the place. Being of a scientifically-inclined mind I prefer to base my opinion on studies that show evidence of significant statistical influence on deterrence and recidivism. Unfortunately, most of these arguments tend to ignore hard data and concentrate on grandstanding and appeals to emotion. So I would pass.
 
...or the left-wing Socialist university students who decided to protest the perfectly-legitimate viewpoints of a Conservative Senator by marching on his office, entering his office, forcing (through their obnoxious behavior) office staff to hide in fear in a back room, trashing his office, and getting in punishment...nothing. Not even a slap in the wrist.

Disruption and violent behaviour are becoming trademark tools of the socialist left (or, as they call it, their right to express themselves), and there is a systemic failure by the courts to show that such behavior has no place in society.
 
Since I do not live in Australia and do not follow its internal affairs, a link to a news report by a reputable source will be helpful.

Meanwhile, in the Northern hemisphere, police are busy with beating up peaceful protesters, innocent bystanders and journalists, arresting them for "resisting arrest" and generally brutalizing the population. So I guess it evens out in the end.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_G-20_Toronto_summit_protests#June_27:_Police_brutality_protests
 
I do not know with the different trial systems in other countries but I can speak for my own country. I've read some cases and some of the facts were stretched or makes no sense at all. It's heavily one-sided. The problem in the judiciary branch is that there is few access to the courts, heavy bottle neck, widespread perception of graft and corruption.

:( The most troublesome is that cases can take very long time, extending over years. Even after the trial in the Supreme Court, the case may be returned to the lower regional courts.
 
Based on 20 years in criminal defense, I'd say the system gets it right about 95% of the time. If you've been charged you've almost certainly done more or less what the government prosecutors say you have. The sentence you get will be about what everyone else gets. The system is really lenient when it comes to drug users, hard on people who are trafficking. Felony convictions can be reduced to misdemeanors, misdemeanors can be expunged from your record. Plea deals can get around things like immigration consequences. My job almost always was to make sure the government (or the trial court) didn't mess up. I've put more criminals back on he streets because of prosecution / LEO error than actually innocent people, because I can't actually recall someone who was actually innocent.
 
freeko said:
You are, or were, an officer of the court?
Click to expand...


I'm an officer of several courts, each time I swore an oath to defend the Constitution, similar to the one I swore as a naval officer or you did, or might, if you ever serve. Don't sweat it. You don't have to like how it works, but don't delude yourself into thinking you know how the game is really played. The system doesn't magically produce TRVTH. "Due process" is a process, follow the rules, turn the handle and what emerges is something society accepts as fair. Anyway, something like 95% of criminal defendants admit their guilt openly in court. This country offers so many second chances that I'd say the one thing every criminal has in common with every other criminal is that they're all bloody stupid.
 
Sync said:
...or the left-wing Socialist university students who decided to protest the perfectly-legitimate viewpoints of a Conservative Senator by marching on his office, entering his office, forcing (through their obnoxious behavior) office staff to hide in fear in a back room, trashing his office, and getting in punishment...nothing. Not even a slap in the wrist.

Disruption and violent behaviour are becoming trademark tools of the socialist left (or, as they call it, their right to express themselves), and there is a systemic failure by the courts to show that such behavior has no place in society.
Click to expand...

Essentially. They can show up at people’s homes and do as they please, it’s pretty sick honestly. Sadly, political talk on a roleplay site is notmy cup of tea, so I’m just going to say everyone is shitty and you and me are here all together
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom